Sample Cases from our office

In this case we assisted a client whose employee, with a valid H-1 visa stamped in this passport, traveled outside the U.S. and was unable to return due to the COVID 19 travel restrictions. We prepared a comprehensive letter with details about the petitioning employer, the specific project that the employee would be assigned to, and the urgency of the employee’s presence in the U.S., to the consulate requesting consideration under the National Interest Exception (NIE) for business travel to the U.S. for vital support of the U.S. healthcare and public health sector, a critical infrastructure sector. We followed up with the consulate and the visa was approved.

Status: We followed up with the consulate and the visa was approved.

We assisted an employer in successfully responding to a Request for Evidence (RFE) received subsequent to the filing of an H-1B (specialty occupation worker) extension petition. The RFE requested additional information regarding the employer and the beneficiary’s qualifications. More specifically, the RFE questioned the evidentiary value of an education evaluation that was provided with the petition, requesting additional evidence regarding the qualifications of the college official who authored the evaluation. The RFE also requested additional evidence that the beneficiary had progressively responsible experience and recognition of expertise through progressively responsible positions. We responded with additional information about the employer, and appropriately rebutted USCIS conclusions about the evaluation.  Over anticipated objections, we showed how the evaluation examined and evaluated existing qualifications of the beneficiary, and was NOT new information. The case was approved.

Status: Over anticipated objections, we showed how the evaluation examined and evaluated existing qualifications of the beneficiary, and was NOT new information. The case was approved. 

We were approached by an employer in the health and wellness industry to respond to an RFE (Request for Evidence) for an Operations Research Analyst. The RFE indicated that the job duties were vague, and did not allow Service to ascertain the minimum requirements for the position, or determine whether it constituted a specialty occupation. We responded with considerable detail, elaborating on the job duties and providing considerable context about the employer and the strict FDA (Food and Drug Administration) regulations that they are required to operate under.  We also included significant corroborating evidence expounding on the positional requirements and complexity of the job. The petition was approved.

Status: The petition was approved.

We filed an H-1B extension for a specialized medical practice on behalf of a physician who had completed a fellowship in this specialty. We subsequently received a Request for Evidence questioning whether his position satisfied the requirements for a specialty occupation and questioning his current immigration status. In our response we noted facts that were already on the record, included probative data from a occupational handbook often cited by the government, and argued that when the offered position requires highly specialized knowledge such as this and when it is established, through his credentials, that the beneficiary possesses such specialized knowledge, the statutory requirements have been established. We argued that the evidence already on the record proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the offered position comports with the government’s  description. Nevertheless, we did provide additional evidence in support of this. We also addressed the question as to beneficiary’s maintenance of his current immigration status by providing evidence and explanation about how he was paid by the employer. The petition was approved seven days after our filing of the RFE Response.  

Status: The petition was approved seven days after our filing of the RFE Response.
 

We assisted petitioner, a public accounting firm, in filing an H-1B petition for beneficiary for the position of staff accountant. We received an RFE requesting additional evidence that the position qualified as a specialty occupation by satisfying at least one of the four qualifying criteria for a specialty occupation.  In our lengthy response, we argued that the job duties, as detailed in the petition, and as compared with OOH’s job description for staff accountant not only comports with but goes beyond OOH guidance in its uniqueness and complexity.  We were able to show that although the employee's qualifying degree was not specifically in accounting, it was in an equivalent field with a shared body of specialized knowledge. The petition was approved shortly after filing the response.

Status: We were able to show that although the employee's qualifying degree was not specifically in accounting, it was in an equivalent field with a shared body of specialized knowledge. The petition was approved shortly after filing the response.